The middle class has shrunk under Obama

[Csainvestor]

Last edited Sat Mar 5, 2016, 12:34 PM - Edit history (2)

The middle class in America is now a minority class. There are now more poor people in America than middle class citizens. Still, billionaires make trillions every single year. is this the America Hillary wants to continue, is that incremental change.

Destroy the middle class transfer trillions to billionaires? This is what happened during Obama's tenure and it will continue under Clinton.


http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/

The American Middle Class Is Losing Ground
No longer the majority and falling behind financially
DECEMBER 9, 2015

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Well, yeah, but certainly not just him.

Both wings of the 'business before people' party worked together to destroy the middle class. To be honest, it would have been even worse if Congress hadn't been anti-Obama enough to reject his 'Grand Bargain'.

[Blus4u]

2. This started happening long before Obama.

nt.

[Le Taz Hot]

63. Ths started happenening

when the Democratic Party wouldn't back AN INCUMBANT PRESIDENT because they thought he was too liberal (Carter). Then their dream candidate showed up who had no qualms about selling out his party, this country, and the world's poor so he could be president. Now his wife wants a turn. Rah rah party.

[Blus4u]

64. You are more than right.

And we would have been so much better off if we, as a country, would have listened to him regarding energy and the need to extricate ourselves from middle eastern oil.

Peace

[RKP5637]

3. Yep, it will be the SOS. And SOS is so entrenched in America I often wonder if it has to totally

collapse before anything can improve. There was the chance in 2008 to fix it, but again, it's the SOS! We've been stuck in this mode for several decades. Obama did not start it all. It started with Reagan.

[Boxerfan]

4. The presumption in your title tells me all I need to know...

That you are probably here only to disrupt. Enjoy your short stay & please stay away from Democratic party bashing.

[Broward]

8. Your response tells me all I need to know...

That you are probably a blind supporter of labels rather than policies.

[Boxerfan]

22. Yes it does...

That I actually support Democratic policies & think divisive tactics-as shown by his/your title...Are just not needed or welcome.

[Csainvestor]

14. can you read?

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/

The American Middle Class Is Losing Ground
No longer the majority and falling behind financially
DECEMBER 9, 2015

[Boxerfan]

23. Tell me how President Obama made that happen??

Because you make a false assumption in your title. Please bag it & take it to FR

[CentralMass]

33. By continuing George W. Bush's fiscal policies

By not changing the countries direction. By not even talking about or acknowledging it. We have 46.4 million living in poverty. Up by around 9 million over the last 8 years.something like 42.5% of Hispanic children are living in poverty and 38.5% black children are among them.
Workers wages as a share of the GDP haven't been this low since 1929 while corporate profits are at a record high. The national debt continues to soar. We are at $19 trillion (104% of GDP) having added $ 9.2 trillion of it in the last 8 years.The debt is due to financial malfeasance, greed and bad governing.

The middle class is bleeding a slow death. The country b is decline. From a crumbling infrastructure to a decaying underfunded public Education system.

[uppityperson]

58. Did Congress have anything to do with that? Or is it all Obama's fault?

[CentralMass]

59. As a Senator, he and his democratic colleagues passed TARP.

After running on a promise to repeal the Bush Tax cuts he wouldn't even let them automatically "sunset " in 2010.He lobbied his lame duck majority to extend them.

He repeatedly put SS on the chopping block during his "Grand Bargain " budget negotioans. He pushed and got a payroll tax deduction that IMO harmed SS. http://www.npr.org/2011/12/07/143241709/how-payroll-tax-cut-affects-social-securitys-future

He cut billions in funding to the LIHEAP program (and bragged that is showed his willingness to make tough budget decisions ) that provide home heating oil assistance .http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2011/02/09/133629567/obama-to-propose-deep-cuts-in-home-heating-program

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2011/12/18/congress-cuts-liheap-because-giving-billions-to-the-rich-is-no-fun-unless-you-also-get-to-screw-the-poor/

The President also rammed the TPP down our throats and made sure there could be no debate on it.

I can site more but the point here is that this guy is no Democrat by my definition of the term.The party has shifted right. The party machine and Hillary are attacking Sanders for wanting to change the paradigm.

Running on the last 8 years and promising more of it and passing out more tax cuts to win votes is not going to pull us out of the death spiral.

[laundry_queen]

61. +1 nt

[Broward]

25. So many, including Dems, make it too easy for the oligarchs.

Some will never get it.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

5. It's been under attack since LONG before Obama. Don't dump all that on him.

[narnian60]

19. +1

[Broward]

6. Obama comes from the corporatist wing of the Dem Party.

Although there are many forces at play, he's no friend to the middle class evidenced by his support for the TPP.
Things will only get worse with Hillary.

[kath]

18. This.

[ladjf]

7. ... it will continue at an exponentially accelerating rate. nt

[RKP5637]

12. My fear is we haven't seen anything yet. It's pathetic. And even more pathetic is so damn

many Americans still don't get what's going on as they get pushed to the bottom.

[ladjf]

21. Your fear is well founded. It could well go worse than we had imagined. nt

[mmonk]

9. True. He saved many from rapid collapse with stimulus.

But the Third Way or New Democrat way in economics is still a version of the Republican Party way.

[BernieforPres2016]

10. Continuation of a 35 year trend

Right through Republican and Democratic administrations. Trickle down and Third Way economics.

[RKP5637]

13. Exactly!!!!! n/t

[liberal_at_heart]

30. That is exactly what it is.

[brush]

11. Give us a break. That trend started long before Obama. Try Reagan if you wanna be accurate.

This premise is going to be a hard sell here on DU but enjoy your stay.

[BernieforPres2016]

16. Of course it started long before Obama

But if neither Bill Clinton or Barack Obama could reverse that trend in 2 terms each (which comprise almost half of the 35 years or so that it has been going on), is there any reason to think it won't continue under a Hillary Clinton administration, particularly since she's running basically as an extension of the Obama presidency?

[brush]

28. You're forgetting the 90s (Clinton's era) when everyone was working . . .

and the economy was booming. And Obama's stimulus that put the brakes on W's horrible debacle of economy-wrecking, tax cutting policies. Obama also saved the auto industry btw and all those jobs.

Look back through history. You'll find a trend that keeps repeating itself. Depressions and recessions happen during repug administrations and dems get in and things turn around — Hoover-Great Depression; Eisenhower-late '50s recession; Reagan-huge stock market crash, Daddy Bush-recession; W Bush-Great Recession.

Wash, cut taxes on the rich, rinse, repeat. It keeps happening because of repug policies and the dems get in and have to bail the country out.

[BernieforPres2016]

43. Spare me the historical revisionism

The increasing share of income flowing to the top 1% continued unabated through the Clinton administration. Look at the long term charts. The Clinton administration was friendlier to Wall Street than the Reagan and Bush 41 administrations. Two reappointments of Alan Greenspan, Bob Rubin, Larry Summers, financial deregulation, etc.

[brush]

48. Revisionism? Were not more middle and lower income people working during the '90s . . .

and thus slowing that trend that Reagan started?

[BernieforPres2016]

51. According to this WaPo analysis, "extreme poverty grew" and "income inequality skyrocketed"

during the Clinton administration. Taxes didn't become more progressive to address the income inequality. And financial deregulation and trade deals like NAFTA championed by Clinton and passed during his administration had long term impacts on income inequality and the stagnant to declining jobs and wages of lower and middle income people that went far beyond the Clinton administration.

Median wages did grow.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/05/the-clinton-economy-in-charts/

[Adrahil]

31. No one, not even Bernie, can reverse the trend by themselves.

Obama proposed many policies that could have begun that process. They all died in Congress. So will the next Democratic President's proposals.

Once again: Obama proposed policies that would have helped.

[marew]

29. You beat me to it!

The decline began under Reagan!

"For most workers, real wages have barely budged for decades"
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

http://www.thenation.com/article/reagans-real-legacy/

[Dem2]

15. A bit of perspective is due here:

(Hint: Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bushes)

[Bread and Circus]

24. I would rather see median incomes rather than an averages

[Dem2]

27. OK

"We have recaptured all of the income losses that have occurred since the beginning of the last recession in December 2007. The December 2015 median is now only 0.4 percent lower than the median of $57,371 in January 2000, the beginning of this statistical series.”

[liberal_at_heart]

32. You can put up all the graphs you want. You can claim that there has been a recovery.

The American people are not stupid. They know when they are losing money. They know when they can't afford prescriptions or rent or college tuition or retirement and the billionaires own 5 houses, 5 yachts, and 20 cars that something isn't right. The truth is wages have been stagnant for over 30 years and the cost of living has increased steadily every year. The American people know this. Hillary and her supporters cannot fake what the American people experience in their everyday lives.

[Dem2]

37. It was the worst recession of my lifetime, the plots show that.

I never said everything was better, just presenting some factual information that somewhat counters the O/P.

BTW, the plot includes cost of living and yes, real wages have been flat since 2000 and declined since the '80's, that's not in question. What is true, however, is that we've had a decent recovery after a near-depression in 2007 - at least back to where we were before that. I never said everything was good.

[Bread and Circus]

50. ^^^ This. People aren't stupid. And it is very easy to lie with statistics. People are hurting.

It is obvious to anyone in the real world (hint: not a penthouse in Manhattan).

[olddots]

17. can we survive progress ?

the industrial revolution , the transportation revolution and the computer/robotic revolution .Government can be a safe guard or a pawn in this game .Blaming Obama or anyone for technilogical progress is missing the point .

[Bread and Circus]

20. I have read this as well. It's been the goal of Reaganism and Clintonism...Obama is responsible

only insofar as he hasn't really fundamentally changed anything.

[marew]

34. Good Grief! Obama has at least tried!

Remember the very day he took office for the first time, the GOP met and agreed to do whatever they could to keep him from doing anything positive. Put the blame where it belongs.

Please read the following:
http://www.ohio.com/blogs/mass-destruction/blog-of-mass-destruction-1.298992/when-obama-had-total-control-of-congress-1.332977 Did President Obama ever have "total control" of Congress? Yes, for 4 entire months. And it was during that very small time window that Obamacare was passed in the Senate with 60 all-Democratic votes.

Also: http://cjonline.com/blog-post/lucinda/2012-06-01/no-obama-did-not-control-congress-his-first-two-years

[liberal_at_heart]

39. And he could have used that opportunity to make sure Obamacare had a public option.

[BernieforPres2016]

44. Part of the job of a President is selling his policies and party to the American public

Do Obama and the DNC bear no responsibility for the enormous loss in Democratic governors, Senators, members of the U.S. Congress and members of state legislatures?

Should the attitude of Democratic voters be let's pick the candidate who can best maintain the status quo?

[Bread and Circus]

49. Fundamentally? Really? With Summers and Geithner? And the bailout? No bankster going to jail?

[kydo]

26. Actually the middle class shrunk under republician ruled Congress

Just imagine where we would be if the repugs in congress acted like mature adult congress peeps and senators? The things that needed to happen would have happened and we would be one kick ass place. But thanks to the "No!" peeps, ie republicans we are losing our middle class and many other things.


Obama has been great. Repugs not so much. Ok nothing, thats what they have done, nadda, zip, zero. Those are the peeps we need to be working on replacing.

[brush]

35. Yep! If the repug congress had just okayed infrastructure modernization . . .

(bridges, roads, sewers/water pipes, power grid, airports, high-speed rail) the economy would be roaring for decades to come with all that work to be done and the good jobs created.

[liberal_at_heart]

36. The middle class have been declining for over 30 years. This is the fault of both parties.

[CentralMass]

55. Yes and it's time that we hold their feet to the fire over it.

[marew]

40. You are absolutely correct!

I suspect this is exactly why the GOP is in such chaos right now. Even their own members are disgusted with their own party's years of obstructionism. The GOP created their own self-destructive, all consuming monster.

[ScreamingMeemie]

65. ^This

[Orsino]

38. The ACA and bailouts were emergency measures that helped...

...despite Congress' near-paralysis.

What Obama vetoed prevented a lot of damage, too.

[liberal_at_heart]

41. The American people get to bail out the banks, pay tens of thousands of dollars in

premiums, deductibles, and copays and get told be thankful you have a low wage job. What happens the next time the banks go under? Who gets that bill? There will be a revolt the next time this happens and it will happen again.

[Orsino]

42. Yes, but Democrats act to mitigate the damage...

...done by an unsustainable system.

We do indeed need change.

[liberal_at_heart]

45. I don't believe they do act to mitigate the damage. We have someone like Bernie who is

willing to stand up and say we need to expand Medicare for all. We need tuition free college. We need to stop passing trade policies and visa policies that destroy American jobs. We need a living wage, and yet the Democratic party does not want these things. They don't want to discuss raising taxes at all out of fear of losing votes but what they are losing sight of is they are still losing votes because what happens when you don't raise taxes? You have to cut social services. And that is exactly what the Democratic Party has been doing. Instead of stating the truth and saying we need to raise taxes they just go along with cutting social services. That is not mitigating the damage. That is contributing to it.

[BernieforPres2016]

57. Perhaps that could be a campaign slogan

"Vote for Hillary. She will mitigate the damage."

[MisterP]

46. ever since Eli Black a corporation can be worth the most when worth nothing

frankly the economy's being kept afloat by selling off the middle class, with a shrinking and unstable wage-less investing gentry that can profit from it remaining suitably large to keep the illusion afloat

[liberal_at_heart]

47. Very well said!

[BernieforPres2016]

52. Think about what types of income are favored by the lowest tax rates

"Carried interest", which is a bullshit term for income for hedge fund managers, many of whom make tens of millions per year and some of whom have made hundreds of millions per year: Tax rate 15%

Long term capital gains (on securities held for more than 1 year), overwhelmingly skewed to the top 1%: Tax rate 20%

Dividends from common stocks, overwhelmingly skewed to the top 1%: Tax rate 20%

[MisterP]

53. it's the rentier class: not only do they get as much money during downturns (heck, they did that

in the 1830s) but they're allowed to make all the profit from shuttering a business, with or without moving the jobs abroad

[DCBob]

54. I hear this from Republicans all the time to criticize President Obama.

If anyone it to blame its the Republicans who have thwarted most of the President's efforts to help the middle class.

[Skwmom]

60. You are criticizing Obama's administration. You must be racist (sarcasm intended).

[Le Taz Hot]

62. Rah rah corporatism!

That was so fun we should shove another corporate crony into the White House! Go Hills! NOT!

[BuelahWitch]

66. Also no Social Security COLAs for three years

2010, 2011 and 2016.
It took a DEMOCRATIC administration to make this happen.